Nordyke I decision Occured 04/20/2009. Used intermediate scrutiny and declared 2A's application to state and local government, but said Alameda's ban on gun shows did not violate 2A, used weak intermediate scrutiny test.

Although Chester asserts his right to possess a firearm inhis home for the purpose of self-defense, we believe his claimis not within the core right identified in Heller—the right ofa law-abiding, responsible citizen to possess and carry aweapon for self-defense—by virtue of Chester’s criminal history as a domestic violence misdemeanant. Heller, 128 S. Ct.at 2821. Accordingly, we conclude that intermediate scrutinyis more appropriate than strict scrutiny for Chester and similarlysituated persons.

This was cited to the Nordyke 3 judge panel in what's called a supplemental authorities letter, aka a 28(j) letter. A sister circuit is considered pursuasive authority.

Nordyke isn't purely a "gun show" case. It was the Nordyke I decision which caused the safe handgun roster challenge (Peņa v. Cid) and the carry challenge (Sykes and now Richards) to go forward, despite the fact that gun show lost.